This is getting ridiculous! Today they had a closed door meeting to address issues that were supposed to be addressed the last three times and guess what? No resolution. What is the point? Well at least the defense is getting some more money. I have linked the article about today’s hearing and it is worth a read. It brings up how silly it is for the defense to want to deny media access when the defendant was all over the media. They also want to sequester the jurors, move the trial and monitor the jurors twitter accounts. Read the article for Mr. Martinez’s response. He is the only voice of reason.
The status conference and Motion to Continue Trial date has been re-set from July 18th to July 16th at 8:30 am. No word yet on whether there will be cameras allowed. (Link to the motion: https://www.facebook.com/Justice4Travis). I am expecting Ms. Arias to tweet that this was her decision…
The defense has filed 2 new motions- one to vacate death eligibility and the second to vacate the aggravating factor. One of the primary reasons cited in the motions by the defense is the use of the word ‘especially’ in the phrase: “especially heinous.” Nurmi contends that use of that word implies the statue was designed for a judge, not a jury. He said that ‘layperson jurors’ are left to ‘muddle through’ the definition with a defendant’s life in the balance. Maricopa County Attorney called this a standard procedural move: “Those are defense attorneys doing their job advocating for their client,” Montgomery said Wednesday. “Obviously, we disagree.”
According to ABC15.com’s Corey Rangel, the prosecution has filed a motion asking the judge to deny the motion for a delay filed by the defense. They defense had said they needed time to find other witnesses to stand up for Jodi (they have had 5 years) and that they had scheduling conflicts. Martinez responded: ““Neither reason warrants a continuance of the proceedings until the first part of next year.” For more here’s the link:
According to azcentral.com the defense attorneys filed another motion for mistrial on Sunday. They say the witness Patty Womack withdrew from testifying due to death threats. Kirk Nurmi wrote in the motion ‘After returning home Ms. Womack began receiving threats, threats that included threats on her life if she were to testify on Ms. Arias’ behalf. On May 19th, 2013, Ms. Womack contacted counsel for Ms. Arias that she is no longer willing to testify due to these threats. It should also be noted that theses threats follow those made to Alyce LaViolette, a record of which was made ex-parte and under seal.’
The article goes on to say whether a defense attorney presents mitigation evidence becomes an issue on appeal.
5/7/2013- Motion for discovery – Party (001) 5/8/2013
Note: Defendant’s Motion For Discovery Of Victim Impact Statement.
Apparently the defense (party 001) wants to know what the victims will have to say in advance, should there be a verdict. I have never heard of this. An attorney on Websleuths said that by statute the victim does not have to pre-disclose these statements. I expect there will be a hearing soon.